Cosmetic Evaluation Methods Adapted to Asian Patients after Breast-Conserving Surgery and Examination of the Necessarily Elements for Cosmetic Evaluation.
- Author:
Yuki NOHARA
1
;
Noriko HANAMURA
;
Hisamitsu ZAHA
;
Hiroko KIMURA
;
Yumi KASHIKURA
;
Takashi NAKAMURA
;
Aya NORO
;
Nao IMAI
;
Mai SHIBUSAWA
;
Tomoko OGAWA
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords: Asian continental ancestry group; Esthetics; Outcome assessment; Segmental mastectomy
- MeSH: Asian Continental Ancestry Group*; Breast; Breast Neoplasms; Cicatrix; Consensus; Esthetics; Humans; Mastectomy, Segmental*
- From:Journal of Breast Cancer 2015;18(1):80-86
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
- Abstract: PURPOSE: Although various strategies have been reported, there are no defined criteria for cosmetic evaluation methods after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Since Asians tend to have smaller breasts, indistinct inframammary folds, and conspicuous scars, differences in the cosmetic results are expected. So we examined two subjective methods and one objective method to determine the differences, and elements necessary for a cosmetic evaluation after BCS. METHODS: Frontal photographs of 190 Japanese were evaluated using the Harris scale (Harris) and the evaluation method proposed by the Japanese Breast Cancer Society Sawai group (Sawai group) as the subjective methods, and the Breast Cancer Conservation Treatment cosmetic results (BCCT.core) as the objective method, respectively. In order to examine the necessary elements for developing a new ideal method, 100 out of 190 were selected and assessed separately by six raters using both the Harris and modified Sawai group methods in the observer assessment. The correlation between the two methods was examined using the Spearman rank-correlation coefficient. RESULTS: The results of the BCCT.core and the other two methods were clearly different. In the observer assessment, the consensuses of the six raters were evaluated as follows: 27, 27, 26, and 20 cases were evaluated as "excellent," "good," "fair," and "poor," respectively. For the Spearman rank-correlation coefficient, values higher than 0.7 indicated a strong correlation, as seen by the values of 0.909 for the breast shape and 0.345 for the scar. The breast shape accounted for the most significant part of the evaluation, and the scar had very little correlation. CONCLUSION: In this study, we recognized a clear difference between the subjective and objective evaluation methods, and identified the necessary elements for cosmetic evaluation. We would like to continue developing an ideal cosmetic evaluation that is similar to subjective one and is independent from raters.
